Jesus was the head of every man

JESUS WAS THE HEAD OF EVERY MAN
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
1 Corinthians11:3 New International Version(NIV)
3 But I want you to realize that the head of every man
is Christ, and the head of the woman is man,[a] and
the head of Christis God.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
The Hierarchy
1 Corinthians 11:3
J.R. Thomson
Before entering upon particular counsels with regard to the attire of the two
sexes respectivelyin the Christian assemblies, St. Paul lays down a great
generalprinciple, from which, rather than from custom or from experience,
he deduces the specialduties devolving upon the members of Christ's Church.
The case upon which he was consulted, and upon which he gave his advice,
has lostall practicalinterest, and is to us merely an antiquarian curiosity; but
the greatprinciple propounded in connectionwith it holds good for all time.
I. THE APPOINTED SUBORDINATIONOF WOMAN TO MAN. There is a
sense in which there is equality betweenthe sexes. In Christ Jesus there is

neither male nor female. The gospelis intended for and is offeredto both men
and women. Both are equally dear to him who died for all. As in Jesus'earthly
ministry he wrought cures and expelled demons for the relief of women, and
as he chose certainwomenas his personalfriends, and as he willingly
acceptedthe affectionate and generous ministration of other women; so in the
dispensationof the Spirit he numbers women amongsthis people, and
honours them by promoting them to his service. There is, so to speak, spiritual
equality. But domestic and socialequality is quite another thing. In the
household and in the congregationthere must be subjection and submission.
"Order is Heaven's first law." "The head of the woman is the man." And this
notwithstanding that many men are base and unworthy of their positionand
calling; notwithstanding that many women are not only pure, but noble and
well fitted for command.
II. THE ARCHETYPE IN SPIRITUAL AND HEAVENLY RELATIONS TO
WHICH THIS ORDER CONFORMS.
1. Man is not supreme, though invested with a limited authority. "The head of
every man is Christ." He, the Sonof man, has the primacy over this
humanity. In wisdom and in righteousness, in powerand in grace, the Lord
Jesus is superior and supreme. The law is revealedin him and administered
by him. Every man is morally bound to subjection and submission to the
Divine Man. And he is Head over all things to his Church. This is the truth,
the ideal, the purpose of eternal wisdom; though, alas!often misunderstood,
or forgotten, or denied by men.
2. Even in the Godheadthere is an officialsubordination of the Son to the
Father; "the head of Christ is God." This language takesus into the regionof
heavenly things, of Divine mysteries. But it reveals to us the factthat the
universe is one greathierarchy, of which not every member is mentioned here,
only certain leading dominant notes being successivelysoundedin the celestial
scale. Menmay suppose that order and subordination in human society, civil
and ecclesiastical, are merely expedients for peace and quietness. But it is not
so;there is Divine archetype to which human relationships and affairs
conform. Let there be nonconformity to this, and there is discord breaking in
upon the harmonious minstrelsy of the spiritual universe. Let there be

conformity, and the sweetconcertproves that earth is in tune with heaven. -
T.
Biblical Illustrator
But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ; and the head
of every woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
1 Corinthians 11:3-16
Christ our Head
E. W. Shalders, B.A.
This important statementis the starting-point for a deliverance on the subject
of the conduct of women in the Church. The apostle often, in dealing with
matters of trifling importance or limited interest, rises to the enunciation of
the grand principle on which it rests. Here he gives the principle first. Let us
look at our relationship with Christ —
I. THROUGH ITS EARTHLY SHADOW.
1. In building the house of the human family God made the man the head of
the woman, the husband or bond of the house. This headship carries with it
responsibility; for if wives are to obey their husbands, husbands are to love
their wives as Christ loved the Church, and so make the wifely duty a joy.
2. In this sense, onlywith deepened meaning, Christ is the head of every man,
i.e., of the race. And just as the wife attains the end of her being on the earthly
side in her husband; as she finds the sum of her womanly ambitions and
duties in promoting his welfare;as she is entitled to look to him for protection,
counsel, tenderness, and example; as she is to seek in him the rounding of her
present life and the fulness of her earthly joy; so the members of the human
family are to look up to Christ as their Head. None of us is complete without
Him. And just as trust and obedience unite a woman to her husband and
enable him to fulfil his obligations to her, so it is by faith and submission that
Jesus is able to accomplishHis saving, life-giving work. There is therefore

deep truth in the representationof the exaltationof the Church to glory as a
marriage supper.
II. IN ITS HEAVENLY ARCHETYPES — God's headship over Christ.
1. In His Divine, eternal essence Christis "the brightness of His Father's
glory," etc., God's realisedideal, a vesselinto which Godhas poured all the
fulness of the Divine nature, a vesselof Godheadeternally equal to that which
it contains and perfectly full.
2. In the light of this look once more at your relationship to Christ. "As the
Father hath loved Me" (John 15:9, 10). We are to reflect Christ just as He
reflects God, and appears, therefore, full of grace and truth.Conclusion: "The
head of every man is Christ."
1. Then Christ is just yourself, idealisedand perfected — the prophecy of
what you are to become. He is not a glorified man merely, but glorified
humanity.
2. This greatfact throws light on the doctrine of substitution. Christ became
man, not a man. Just as we were all in Adam, and are so many multiplied
copies of him, so Christ became the secondAdam, and God looks atus in
Him. Since, then, He was a representative man, all He did and suffered on
earth had a representative character.
(E. W. Shalders, B.A.)
Human and Divine relations
Prof. Godet.
There exist three relations which togetherform a sort of hierarchy: lowestin
the scale, the purely human relation betweenman and woman; higher, the
Divine-human relation betweenChrist and man; highest, the purely Divine
relation betweenGod and Christ. The common term whereby Paul
characterises these relations is "head," or chief. This figurative term includes
two ideas — community of life, and inequality within this community. So

betweenthe man and the woman, by the bond of marriage there is formed
betweenthem the bond of a common life, but in such a way that the one is the
strong and directing element, the other the receptive and dependent element.
The same is the case in the relation betweenChrist and the man. Formed by
the bond of faith, it also establishes a community of life, in which there are
distinguished an active and directing principle and a receptive and directed
factor. An analogousrelationappears higher still in the mystery of the Divine
essence. Bythe bond of filiation there is betweenChrist and God communion
of Divine life, but such that impulse proceeds from the Father, and that "the
Son doeth nothing but what He seeththe Father do." The relation between
Christ and the man is put first. It is, so to speak, the link of union betweenthe
other two, reflecting the sublimity of the one and marking the other with a
sacredcharacter, whichshould secure it from the violence with which it is
threatened.
(Prof. Godet.)
The conduct and deportment of Christian women
F. W. Robertson, M.A.
A broad principle laid down by Christianity was human equality: "there is
neither male nor female, but ye are all one in Christ Jesus." We allknow how
fruitful a cause ofpopular commotion the teaching of equality has been in
every age, and at Corinth this doctrine threatened to lead to much social
confusion. A claim was made for a right in woman to do all that men should
do — to preach and pray, e.g., in public, and therefore to appear as men,
unveiled in public. This latter the apostle here prohibits —
I. ON THE GROUND THAT IT WAS A RASH DEFIANCE OF
ESTABLISHED RULES OF DECORUM. The veiled head is a symbol of —
1. Modesty;for to pray unveiled was to insult all the conventional feelings of
Jew and Gentile. The Holy Ghost, however, has not imposed on the Church
this particular fashion, but the principle contained in it is eternal; and it is
impossible to decide how much of our public morality and private purity is

owing to the spirit which refuses to overstepthe smallestbound of ordinary
decorum.
2. Dependence. St. Paulperceived that the law of Christian equality was quite
consistentwith the vast systemof subordination running through the universe
(vers. 3, 11, 12). He distinguishes betweeninferiority and subordination; each
sex exists in a certain order, not one as greaterthan the other, but both great
and right in being what God intended them to be.
II. BY AN APPEAL TO NATURAL INSTINCTS ANN PROPRIETY(vers.
14, 15). Fanaticismdefies nature. Christianity refines it and respects it. It
develops eachnation, sex, and individual, according to their own nature —
making man more manly and woman more womanly. But let us not forget
that here, too, there are exceptions. Beware ofa dead, hard rule. There have
been many instances in which one man standing againstthe world has been
right, and the world wrong, as Elijah, , Luther, and others. But in questions of
morality, propriety, decency, when we find our own private judgment
contradictedby the generalexperience, habit, and belief of all the best around
us, then the doctrine of this chaptercommands us to believe that the many are
right and that we are wrong.
(F. W. Robertson, M.A.)
The veil
M. Dods, D.D.
St. Paul is now compelled to qualify the generalcommendation of ver. 2. He
heard with surprise and vexation that women presumed to address the
assembledChristians unveiled, to the scandalof all sober-minded Orientals
and Greeks.It is a singular specimenof the strange matters that came before
Paul for decisionwhen the care of all the Churches lay upon him.
I. WHAT WAS THE INTENTION OF CHRISTIAN WOMEN IN MAKING
A DEMONSTRATIONSO UNFEMININE?

1. Throughout this letter Paul is correcting the hasty impressions which the
new believers were receiving regarding their position as Christians. A flood of
new ideas was suddenly poured in upon their minds, one of which was the
equality of all before God and of a Saviour for all alike. There was neither
Jew nor Greek, male nor female, etc., now. And it dawned on the woman that
she was neither man's toy nor slave, but that she had a life to frame for
herself. She was not dependent on men for her Christian privileges; ought she
not to show this by laying aside the veil, which was the acknowledgedbadge of
dependence?
2. Among the Greeks it was the universal custom for the women to appear in
public with the head covered, commonly with the cornerof their shawldrawn
over their head like a hood. It was the one significantrite in marriage that she
assumedthe veil in tokenthat now her husband was her head. This covering
could be dispensedwith only in places where they were secludedfrom public
view. It was therefore the badge which proclaimed that she who wore it was a
private, not a public, person, finding her duties at home, not abroad. It was
the man's place to serve the State or the public, the woman's place to serve the
man.
II. THIS MOVEMENT OF THE CORINTHIAN WOMEN PAUL MEETS
BY REMINDING THEM THAT PERSONALEQUALITY IS PERFECTLY
CONSISTENTWITH SOCIAL SUBORDINATION.The woman must not
argue that because she is independent of her husband in the greatersphere
she must also be independent of him in the less (ver. 3). This principle is of
incalculable importance and very wide and constantapplication.
1. Whateveris meant by the natural equality of men, it cannot mean that none
are to have authority over others. In order to the harmony of societythere is a
gradationof ranks;and socialgrievancesresult, not from the existence of
socialdistinctions, but from their abuse. This gradation, then, involves Paul's
inference (vers. 4, 5). The veil being the recognisedbadge ofsubordination,
when a man appears veiled he would seemto acknowledgesome one present
and visible as his head, and would thus dishonour Christ, his true Head. A
woman, on the other hand, appearing unveiled would seemto say that she
acknowledgesno visible human head, and thereby dishonours her head — i.e.,

her husband — and so doing, dishonours herself. She puts herself on the level
of the woman with a shavenhead, which both among Jews and Greeks was a
brand of disgrace.
2. This subordination has its roots in nature (vers. 7, 8).(1)Man is the glory of
God because he is His image and is fitted to exhibit in actuallife the
excellenceswhichmake God worthy of our love and worship. But while man
directly, womanindirectly, fulfils this purpose of God. She is God's glory by
being man's glory. She exhibits God's excellences by creating and cherishing
excellence in man (vers. 8, 9). The position assignedto woman as the glory of
man is therefore far removed from the view which cyclicallyproclaims her
man's mere convenience.(2)Thatthis is woman's normal sphere is indicated
even by her unalterable physical characteristics. Bynature womanis endowed
with a symbol of modesty and retirement. The veil is merely the artificial
continuation of her natural gift of hair. The long hair of the Greek fop or of
the Englishcavalierwas acceptedby the people as an indication of effeminate
and luxurious living. And nature, speaking through this visible sign of the
woman's hair, tells her that her place is in the home, not in the city or the
camp; in the attitude of free and loving subordination, not in the seatof
authority and rule. In other respects also the physical constitution of woman
points to a similar conclusion — e.g., her shorter stature and slighterframe,
her higher pitch of voice, her more gracefulform and movement. And similar
indications are found in her mental peculiarities. She has the gifts which fit
her for influencing individuals; man has those qualities which enable him to
deal with persons in the mass. Notall women, of course, are of the
distinctively womanly type. A Britomarte may arm herselfand overthrow the
strongestknights. A Joanof Arc may infuse into a nation her own warlike and
patriotic ardour. In art, in literature, in science,feminine names may occupy
some of the highest places. In our own day many careers have beenopened to
women from which they had hitherto been debarred. Conclusion:A woman is
a woman still though she become a Christian; a subject must honour his king
although by becoming a Christian he is himself in one aspectabove all
authority; a servantwill show his Christianity, not by assuming an insolent
familiarity with his Christian master, but by treating him with respectful

fidelity. It forms a greatpart of our duty to acceptour own place without
envying others, and to do honour to those to whom honour is due.
(M. Dods, D.D.)
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(3) But I would have you know.—Afterthe generalcommendation in the
previous verse, the reprooffor neglecting, ordesiring to neglect, his precepts
in one particular case,is thus introduced. The subject treated of, viz., the
uncovering of their heads by women in assemblies forworship, was of
ephemeral moment, and as we all now would regardit, of trivial importance.
Every circumstance, however, which could in the leastdegree cause the
principles of Christianity to be perverted or misunderstood by the heathen
world was of vital importance in those early days of the Church, and hence we
find the Apostle, who most fearlesslytaught the principles of Christian liberty,
condemning most earnestly every application of those principles which might
be detrimental to the best interests of the Christian faith. To feel bound to
assertyour liberty in every detail of socialand political life is to ceaseto be
free—the very liberty becomes a bondage.
The head of every man is Christ.—The Apostle does not merely treat of the
outward practice on which his advice has been sought, but proceeds to lay
down the principles which are opposed to the principle of that absolute and
essentialequality, which, found its expressionand assertionin the practice of
women uncovering their heads in public assemblies.
The allusion here is not to Christ as the Head of the whole human race and of
all things (as in Ephesians 1:22;Colossians1:16;Colossians2:10), but as the
Head of “the Body,” the Christian Church: and this thought introduces the
generalargument regarding the practical subordination of woman, by

reminding the Corinthians that though there is in the Church a perfect
spiritual equality (as taught in Galatians 3:28), yet that it is an equality which
is of order and not of disorder—that it is an equality which can only be
preservedby remembering that eachis not an isolatedirresponsible atom, but
a part of an organic whole. There is a Head to the Church, therefore it is not a
machine composedof various parts, but a body consisting of various
members. As there is a subordination of the whole body to Christ, so there is
in that body a subordination of woman to man. The lastclause, “the Head of
Christ is God,” gives (as is St. Paul’s custom, see 1Corinthians 3:23;
1Corinthians 8:6; 1Corinthians 15:25)completeness to the thought. As the
Head of the Church—i.e., as the man Christ Jesus—Christis subordinate to
the Father, and, indeed, perhaps the idea is carried farther into the mystery of
the divine nature itself, as consisting ofthree Persons co-eternaland co-equal,
yet being designatedwith an unvarying sequence as “first,” and “second,”and
“third.”
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
11:2-16 Here begin particulars respecting the public assemblies,ch. 1Co 14. In
the abundance of spiritual gifts bestowedonthe Corinthians, some abuses had
crept in; but as Christ did the will, and sought the honour of God, so the
Christian should avow his subjectionto Christ, doing his will and seeking his
glory. We should, even in our dress and habit, avoid every thing that may
dishonour Christ. The womanwas made subject to man, because made for his
help and comfort. And she should do nothing, in Christian assemblies, which
lookedlike a claim of being equal. She ought to have power, that is, a veil, on
her head, because of the angels. Their presence shouldkeepChristians from
all that is wrong while in the worship of God. Nevertheless, the man and the
woman were made for one another. They were to be mutual comforts and
blessings, not one a slave, and the other a tyrant. God has so settledmatters,
both in the kingdom of providence and that of grace, that the authority and
subjection of eachparty should be for mutual help and benefit. It was the
common usage of the churches, for womento appearin public assemblies, and
join in public worship, veiled; and it was right that they should do so. The

Christian religion sanctions national customs whereverthese are not against
the greatprinciples of truth and holiness; affectedsingularities receive no
countenance from any thing in the Bible.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
But I would have you know - "I invite your attention particularly to the
following considerations, in order to form a correctopinion on this subject."
Paul does not at once answerthe inquiry, and determine what ought to be
done; but he invites their attention to a series of remarks on the subject, which
led them to draw the conclusionwhich he wished to establish. The phrase here
is designedto callthe attention to the subject, like that used so often in the
New Testament, "he that hath ears to hear, let him hear."
That the head ... - The word "head," in the Scriptures, is designedoften to
denote "master, ruler, chief." The word ‫ׁשאר‬ ro'sh is often thus used in the
Old Testament;see Numbers 17:3; Numbers 25:15;Deuteronomy 28:13,
Deuteronomy 28:44;Judges 10:18;Judges 11:8, Judges 11:11; 1 Samuel
15:17;2 Samuel 22:44. In the New Testamentthe word is used in the sense of
Lord, ruler, chief, in Ephesians 1:22;Ephesians 4:15; Ephesians 5:23;
Colossians 2:10. Here it means that Christ is the ruler, director, or Lord of the
Christian man. This truth was to be regardedin all their feelings and
arrangements, and was never to be forgotten. Every Christian should recollect
the relationin which he stands to him, as one that is suited to produce the
strictestdecorum, and a steadysense ofsubordination.
Of every man - Every Christian. All acknowledgeChristas their Ruler and
Master. They are subject to him; and in all proper ways recognize their
subordination to him.
And the head of the woman is the man - The sense is, she is subordinate to
him, and in all circumstances -in her demeanor, her dress, her conversation,
in public and in the family circle - should recognize her subordination to him.
The particular thing here referred to is, that if the woman is inspired, and
speaks orprays in public, she should by no means lay aside the usual and
proper symbols of her subordination. The dangerwas, that those who were
under the influence of inspiration would regardthemselves as freed from the

necessityofrecognising that, and would lay aside the "veil," the usual and
appropriate symbol of their occupying a rank inferior to the man. This was
often done in the temples of the pagandeities by the priestesses,and it would
appear also that it had been done by Christian females in the churches.
And the head of Christ is God - Christ, as Mediator, has consentedto assume
a subordinate rank, and to recognize Godthe Fatheras superior in office.
Hence, he was obedient in all things as a Son; he submitted to the
arrangementrequired in redemption; he always recognizedhis subordinate
rank as Mediator, and always regardedGod as the supreme Ruler, even in the
matter of redemption. The sense is, that Christ, throughout his entire work,
regardedhimself as occupying a subordinate station to the Father; and that it
was proper from his example to recognize the propriety of rank and station
everywhere.
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
3. The Corinthian women, on the ground of the abolition of distinction of
sexes in Christ, claimedequality with the male sex, and, overstepping the
bounds of propriety, came forward to pray and prophesy without the
customary head-covering of females. The Gospel, doubtless, did raise women
from the degradationin which they had been sunk, especiallyin the East. Yet,
while on a level with males as to the offer of, and standing in grace (Ga 3:28),
their subjection in point of order, modesty, and seemliness,is to be
maintained. Paul reproves here their unseemliness as to dress:in 1Co 14:34,
as to the retiring modesty in public which becomes them. He grounds his
reproof here on the subjectionof womanto man in the order of creation.
the head—anappropriate expression, when he is about to treat of woman's
appropriate headdress in public.
of every man … Christ—(Eph 5:23).
of … woman… man—(1Co 11:8; Ge 3:16; 1Ti 2:11, 12;1Pe 3:1, 5, 6).
head of Christ is God—(1Co 3:23;15:27, 28;Lu 3:22, 38;Joh 14:28;20:17;
Eph 3:9). "Jesus, therefore, must be of the same essenceas God:for, since the
man is the head of the woman, and since the head is of the same essence as the

body, and Godis the head of the Son, it follows the Son is of the same essence
as the Father" [Chrysostom]. "The woman is of the essenceofthe man, and
not made by the man; so, too, the Sonis not made by the Father, but of the
essenceofthe Father" [Theodoret, t. 3, p. 171].
Matthew Poole's Commentary
The abuse which the apostle is reflecting upon in this and the following verses,
is women’s praying or prophesying with their heads uncovered, againstwhich
the apostle stronglyargues. His argument seems to be this: That the woman in
religious services oughtto behave herself as a person in subjection to her
husband, and accordinglyto use such a gesture, as, according to the guise and
custom of that country, testified such a subjection; to this purpose he tells us
in this verse,
that the head of every man is Christ. Christ, consideredas God according to
his Divine nature, is the Head of all men and women too in the world; but the
text seemethrather to speak of Christ as Mediator:so the apostle tells us,
Ephesians 5:23, he is
the Head of the church; and the New Testamentoften speaks ofChrist in that
notion, and of believers as his members: in this sense, by every man, we must
understand no more than every Christian, every member of the church.
The head of the womanis the man; the man is calledthe head of the woman,
because by God’s ordinance he is to rule over her, Genesis 3:16;he hath an
excellencyabove the woman, and a powerover her.
The head of Christ is God; and God is the Head of Christ, not in respectof his
essenceand Divine nature, but in respectof his office as Mediator; as the man
is the head of the woman, not in respectof a different and more excellent

essenceand nature, (for they are both of the same nature), but in respectof
office and place, as God hath sethim over the woman. Nor indeed could those
who deny the Divine nature of Christ, easilyhave brought a text more against
their own assertion, than this, which rather proveth, that Godthe Father and
the Lord Jesus Christare equal in nature and essence, thandifferent; for
surely the head is not of a different, but the same nature and essence withthe
members. Nor doth Christ’s subjectionto his Father at all argue an
inequality, or difference from him in nature and essence,more than the
subjection of subjects to a prince argue any such thing. The apostle then
determines this to be the order which God hath set: God is the Head of Christ;
Christ is the Head of his church, and every one that is a member of it; and
man is the head of the woman, he to whom the womanought to be subject. as
the church is subject to Christ, and Christ is subject to his Father; and from
hence he argues as follows.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
But I would have you to know,.... Thoughthey were mindful of him, and
retained in memory many things he had declaredamong them, and keptthe
ordinances as delivered to them; yet there were some things in which they
were either ignorant, or at leastdid not so well advert to, and needed to be put
in mind of, and better informed about: and as the apostle was very
communicative of his knowledge in every point, he fails not to acquaint them
with whatsoevermight be instructive to their faith, and a direction to their
practice:
that the head of every man is Christ; Christ is the head of every individual
human nature, as he is the Creatorand Preserverof all men, and the donor of
all the gifts of nature to them; of the light of nature, of reason, and of all the
rational powers and faculties; he is the head of nature to all men, as he is of
grace to his own people: and so he is as the Governorof all the nations of the
earth, who whether they will or no are subjectto him; and one day every knee
shall bow to him, and every tongue confess that he is the Lord of all.
Moreover, Christ is the head of every believing man; he is generallysaid to be
the head of the church, and so of every man that is a member of it: he is a
common public head, a representative one to all his elect;so he was in

election, and in the covenantof grace;so he was in time, in his death, burial,
resurrection, and ascensionto, and entrance into heaven; and so he is now as
an advocate and intercessorthere: he is the political head of his people, or an
head in such sense, as a king is the head of his nation: he is also an economical
head, or in such sense an head as an husband is the head of his wife, and as a
parent is the head of his family, and as a master is the head of his servants; for
all these relations Christ sustains:yea, he is a natural head, or is that to his
church, as an human head is to an human body: he is a true and proper head,
is of the same nature with his body, is in union to it, communicates life to it, is
superior to it, and more excellentthan it. He is a perfecthead, nothing is
wanting in him; he knows all his people, and is sensible of their wants, and
does supply them; his eye of love is always on them; his ears are open to their
cries;he has a tongue to speak to them, and for them, which he uses;and he
smells a sweetsavourin them, in their gracesand garments, though they are
all his own, and perfumed by himself: there are no vicious humours in this
head, flowing from thence to the body to its detriment, as from Adam to his
posterity, whose headhe was;but in Christ is no sin, nothing but grace,
righteousness, andholiness, spring from him. There's no deformity nor
deficiency in him; all fulness of grace dwells in him to supply the members of
his body; he is an one, and only head, and an ever living and everlasting one.
And the head of the woman is the man, The man is first in order in being, was
first formed, and the womanout of him, who was made for him, and not he
for the woman, and therefore must be head and chief; as he is also with
respectto his superior gifts and excellencies,as strengthof body, and
endowments of mind, whence the womanis calledthe weakervessel;likewise
with regard to pre-eminence or government, the man is the head; and as
Christ is the head of the church, and the church is subjectto him, so the
husband is the head of the wife, and she is to be subject to him in everything
natural, civil, and religious. Moreover, the man is the head of the woman to
provide and care for her, to nourish and cherish her, and to protect and
defend her againstall insults and injuries.
And the head of Christ is God; that is, the Father, not as to his divine nature,
for in respectto that they are one: Christ, as God, is equal to his Father, and
is possessedof the same divine perfections with him; nor is his Father the

head of him, in that sense;but as to his human nature, which he formed,
prepared, anointed, upheld, and glorified; and in which nature Christ
exercisedgrace onhim, he hoped in him, he believed and trusted in him, and
loved him, and yielded obedience to him; he always did the things that pleased
him in life; he prayed to him; he was obedient to him, even unto death, and
committed his soul or spirit into his hands: and all this he did as to his
superior, consideredin the human nature, and also in his office capacityas
Mediator, who as such was his servant; and whose service he diligently and
faithfully performed, and had the characterfrom him of a righteous one; so
that God is the head of Christ, as he is man and Mediator, and as such only.
Geneva Study Bible
{2} But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the
head of the woman is the man; and the {a} head of Christ is God.
(2) He sets down God, in Christ our mediator, as the end and mark not only of
doctrine, but also of ecclesiasticalcomeliness.Thenapplying it to the question
proposed, touching the comelyapparel both of men and women in public
assemblies, he declares that the woman is one degree beneaththe man by the
ordinance of God, and that the man is so subject to Christ, that the glory of
God ought to appear in him for the preeminence of the sex.
(a) In that Christ is our mediator.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary
1 Corinthians 11:3. “After this generalacknowledgment, however, I have still
to bid you lay to heart the following particular point.” And now, first of all,
the principle of the succeeding admonition. Respecting θέλω … εἰδέναι, comp
on 1 Corinthians 10:1; Colossians 2:1.
ΠΑΝΤῸς ἈΝΔΡ.]note the prominent position of the word, as also the article
before ΚΕΦ.: of every man the Head. That what is meant, however, is every
Christian man, is self-evident from this first clause;consequently, Paul is not

thinking of the generalorder of creation(Hofmann), according to which
Christ is the head of all things (Colossians 1:16 f., 1 Corinthians 2:10), but of
the organizationof Christian fellowship, as it is based upon the work of
redemption. Comp Ephesians 5:21 ff.
ΚΕΦΑΛΉ, from which we are not (with Hofmann) to dissociate the
conceptionof an organized whole (this would suit in none of the passages
where the word occurs, Colossians2:10 included), designates in all the three
caseshere the proximate, immediate Head, which is to be speciallynoted in
the secondinstance, forChrist as head of the church (Colossians 1:18;
Ephesians 1:22; Ephesians 4:15) is also head of the woman (comp Ephesians
5:22 f.). The relation indicated by ΚΕΦ. is that of organic subordination, even
in the lastclause:He to whom Christ is subordinate is God (comp 1
Corinthians 3:23, 1 Corinthians 15:28, 1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:15;
Romans 9:5; and see Kahnis, Dogm. III. p. 208 ff.), where the dogmatic
explanation resortedto, that Christ in His human nature only is meant
(Theodoret, Estius, Calovius, al[1757]), is un-Pauline. Neither, again, is His
voluntary subjection referred to (Billroth), but—which is exactlywhat the
argument demands, and what the two first clauses give us—the objective and,
notwithstanding His essentialequality with God (Php 2:6), necessary
subordination of the Sonto the Father in the divine economyof
redemption.[1758]Much polemic discussionas to the misuse of this passage
by the Arians and others may be found in Chrysostom, Theodoret, and
Theophylact.
Galatians 3:28, indeed, shows that the distinction of the sexes is done awayin
Christ (in the spiritual sphere of the Christian life); but this ideal equality of
sex as little does awaywith the empirical subordination in marriage as with
differences of rank in other earthly relations, e.g. of masters and servants.

κεφ. δὲ Χ. ὁ Θεός]The gradationof ranks rises up to the supreme Head over
all, who is the Head of the man also, mediately, through Christ. This makes it
all the more obvious that, on the one hand, the man who prays or speaks as a
prophet before God in the assemblyought not to have his head covered, see 1
Corinthians 11:7; but that, on the other hand, the relation of the women
under discussionis all the more widely to be distinguished from that of the
men.
[1757]l. and others;and other passages;and other editions.
[1758]Melanchthonputs it well: “Deus estcaput Christi, non de essentia
dicitur, sed de ministeriis. Filius mediator accipit ministerium a consilio
divinitatis, sicut saepe inquit: Patermisit me. Fit hic mentio non arcanae
essentiae,sedministerii.”—Eventhe exaltedand reigning Christ is engagedin
this ministerium, and finally delivers up the kingdom to the Father. See 1
Corinthians 15:28.
Expositor's Greek Testament
1 Corinthians 11:3. θέλω δὲ ὑμᾶς εἰδέναι (= οὐ θέλω κ.τ.λ. of 1 Corinthians
10:1; see note): “But I would have you know”—the previous commendation
throws into relief the coming censure. The indecorum in question offends
againsta foundation principle, viz., that of subordination under the Divine
government; this the Cor[1598], with all their knowledge, cannot“know,”or
they would not have allowedtheir women to throw off the ἐξουσία ἐπὶ τῆς
κεφαλῆς (1 Corinthians 11:10). The violated principle is thus stated: “Of
every man the Christ is the head, while the man is head of woman, and God is
head of Christ”. As to the wording of this sentence:παντὸς ἀνδρὸς bears
emphasis in the 1st clause asserting, like the parl[1599]2nd clause, a universal
truth which holds of the man (vir) as such; the predicate of the 1stclause is
distinguished by the def. art[1600],—“Christis the (proper, essential)head,”
etc. (cf. ἡ εἰρήνη, Ephesians 2:14, and see Bm[1601], pp. 124 f.); ὁ Χριστός, in
James , 3 rd clauses, means “the Christ” in the wide scope ofHis offices (cf. 1

Corinthians 10:4, 1 Corinthians 12:12, 1 Corinthians 15:22); for anarthrous
κεφαλὴ γυναικός, cf. note on 1 Corinthians 2:5. That Christ is “every man’s”
true head is an application of the revealedtruth that He is the “one Lord” of
creatednature (1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:15 f.), combined with the
palpable fact that the ἀνὴρ has no (intervening) lord in creation(cf. 9); he
stands forth in worship, amidst his family, with no visible superior, holding
headship direct from his Maker, and brought by his manhood into direct
responsibility to Him “through whom are all things”. Ed[1602], following
Cm[1603]and Mr[1604](not Hn[1605]), limits this manly subordination to
the Christian order of life; “the man is head of the woman in virtue of the
marriage union, Christ of the man in virtue of union with Him through faith”:
but faith is common to the sexes, onthis footing οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ
(Galatians 3:28); on the other hand, in Pauline theology, the law of marriage
and the socialorder are grounded in Christ. Paul’s argument has no force
unless the parl[1606]assertions rest ona common basis. The question is one
that touches the fundamental proprieties of life (1 Corinthians 11:8-15);and
the three headships enumerated belong to the hierarchy of nature.—“The
Christ” of the 3rd clause is “the Christ” of the 1st, without distinction made of
natures or states;He who is “every man’s head,” the Lord of nature, presents
the pattern of loyalty in His perfect obedience to the Father (1 Corinthians
15:28, Galatians 4:4; Hebrews 5:5; Hebrews 5:8, etc.);cf. 1 Corinthians 3:22
f., where with the same δέ … δὲ a chain of subordinate possessionis drawn
out, corresponding to this subordination of rule. Submission in office, whether
of woman to man or Christ to God, consists with equality of nature.
[1598]Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[1599]parallel.
[1600]grammaticalarticle.

[1601]A. Buttmann’s Grammar of the N.T. Greek (Eng. Trans., 1873).
[1602]T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians.
[1603]John Chrysostom’s Homiliœ († 407).
[1604]Meyer’s Criticaland ExegeticalCommentary(Eng. Trans.).
[1605]C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklärung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or1
Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetischesKommentar (1896).
[1606]parallel.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
3. But I would have you know]According to St Paul’s invariable rule, the
question is argued and settledupon the first principles of the Christian
Revelation. In the sight of God all men are equal; yet without distinctions of
rank and office societycould not exist. But equality and order are reconciled
by the revelationof God in Christ.
the head] “In the idea of this word dominion is especiallyexpressed. As in the
human organisationthe exercise ofdominion over all the members proceeds
from the head; so in the family, from man; in the Church, from Christ; in the
universe, from God.”—Olshausen.

of every man is Christ] See Ephesians 1:22; Ephesians 4:15;Colossians1:18;
Colossians 2:19. As the head directs the body, so ought every member of
Christ’s Body to be governedand directed by Christ.
the head of the woman is the man] Cf. Ephesians 5:23. “It appears that the
Christian women at Corinth claimed for themselves equality with the male
sex, to which the doctrine of Christian freedom and the removal of the
distinction of sex in Christ (Galatians 3:28) gave occasion. Christianity had
indisputably done much for the emancipationof women, who in the Eastand
among the Ionic Greeks (it was otherwise among the Dorians and the
Romans)were in a position of unworthy dependence. But this was done in a
quiet, not an over-hasty manner. In Corinth, on the contrary, they had
apparently takenup the matter in a fashion somewhattoo animated. The
women oversteppeddue bounds by coming forward to pray and prophesy in
the assemblies withuncovered head.”—De Wette. Suchpersons are here
reminded that according to God’s word (Genesis 3:16;1 Timothy 2:11; 1
Timothy 2:13) woman was designedto be in subjection, both in societyand in
the family. Of this last, woman’s chief sphere, man was, by God’s ordinance,
the head. Yet (see below, 1 Corinthians 11:5) she is on an equality with man in
her individual relation to Christ.
the head of Christ is God] Cf. ch. 1 Corinthians 3:23, 1 Corinthians 8:6, 1
Corinthians 15:28, and notes. Also St John 14:28. Possiblythis may be added
to prevent the idea from gaining currency that the interval betweenman and
woman was in any degree comparable to that betweenChrist and man. And it
also implies that the whole universe is one vast system of orderly gradation,
from God its Creatordownwards.
Bengel's Gnomen
1 Corinthians 11:3. Δὲ, but) On this subject Paul seems formerly to have given
no commandment, but to have written now for the first time, when he
understood that it was necessary. Bythe expression, I would, he openly

professes his sentiments.—ὅτι, that)Even matters of ceremonyshould be
settled according to the principles of morality, so that they may agree with
those principles. It may be said, How does one and the same reasonin relation
to the head (i.e. of Christ, or of the man) require the man to uncover his head,
and the woman to cover hers? Ans. Christ is not seen;the man is seen;so the
covering of him, who is under Christ is not seen; of her, who is under the man,
is seen.—ἀνδρὸς, γυναικὸς, ofthe man, of the woman) although they do not
live in the state of marriage, 1 Corinthians 11:8, and what follows.—ἡ κεφαλὴ,
the head) This term alludes to the head properly so called, concerning the
condition [the appropriate dress] of which he treats in the following verse. The
common word, Principal,[90]is akin to this use of the term head. The article ἡ
must be presently after twice supplied from this clause.—κεφαλὴ Χριστοῦ, the
head of Christ) 1 Corinthians 3:23, 1 Corinthians 15:28;Luke 3:23; Luke
3:38; John 20:17; Ephesians 3:9, where God is said to have createdall things
by Christ, therefore He is the head of Christ.—ὁ Θεος, God) 1 Corinthians
11:12.
[90] This word is given as it is in the original. In this form, it is not Latin, but
it is probably the German substantive, which signifies head.—T.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 3. - But I would have you know;rather, but I wish you to know. That
the head of every man is Christ. St. Paul, as was customary with him, applies
the loftiest principles to the solution of the humblest difficulties. Given a
question as to what is right or wrong in a particular instance, he always aims
at laying down some greateternal fact to which the duty or decisionis
ultimately referable, and deduces the required rule from that fact. The
headship of Christ is stated in Ephesians 1:22; Ephesians 4:15;and its
application to the superiority of man is laid down also in Ephesians 5:23. The
subordinate position of the woman is also statedin 1 Timothy 2:11, 12; 1 Peter
3:1, 5, 6, etc. This, however, is merely an ordinance of earthly application. In
the spiritual realm "there is neither male nor female" (Galatians 3:28). The
head of the woman is the man. In Christ the distinctions of the sexes are done

away. It was, perhaps, an abuse of this principle which had led the Corinthian
women to assertthemselves and their rights more prominently than decorum
warranted. The head of Christ is God. That Christ is "inferior to the Father
as touching his manhood," that his mediatorial kingdom involves (so far) a
subordination of his coequalGodhead, has been already statedin 1
Corinthians 3:23, and is further found in 1 Corinthians 15:27, 28. This too is
the meaning of John 14:28, "My Father is greaterthan I."
PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR
Verses 3-16
1 Corinthians 11:3-16
But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ; and the head
of every woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
Christ our Head
This important statementis the starting-point for a deliverance on the subject
of the conduct of women in the Church. The apostle often, in dealing with
matters of trifling importance or limited interest, rises to the enunciation of
the grand principle on which it rests. Here he gives the principle first. Let us
look at our relationship with Christ--
I. Through its earthly shadow.

1. In building the house of the human family God made the man the head of
the woman, the husband or bond of the house. This headship carries with it
responsibility; for if wives are to obey their husbands, husbands are to love
their wives as Christ loved the Church, and so make the wifely duty a joy.
2. In this sense, onlywith deepened meaning, Christ is the head of every man,
i.e., of the race. And just as the wife attains the end of her being on the earthly
side in her husband; as she finds the sum of her womanly ambitions and
duties in promoting his welfare;as she is entitled to look to him for protection,
counsel, tenderness, and example; as she is to seek in him the rounding of her
present life and the fulness of her earthly joy; so the members of the human
family are to look up to Christ as their Head. None of us is complete without
Him. And just as trust and obedience unite a woman to her husband and
enable him to fulfil his obligations to her, so it is by faith and submission that
Jesus is able to accomplishHis saving, life-giving work. There is therefore
deep truth in the representationof the exaltationof the Church to glory as a
marriage supper.
II. In its heavenly archetypes--God’s headshipover Christ.
1. In His Divine, eternal essence Christis “the brightness of His Father’s
glory,” etc., God’s realisedideal, a vesselinto which Godhas poured all the
fulness of the Divine nature, a vesselof Godheadeternally equal to that which
it contains and perfectly full.
2. In the light of this look once more at your relationship to Christ. “As the
Father hath loved Me” (John 15:9-10). We are to reflect Christ just as He
reflects God, and appears, therefore, full of grace and truth.
Conclusion:“The head of every man is Christ.”
1. Then Christ is just yourself, idealisedand perfected--the prophecy of what
you are to become. He is not a glorified man merely, but glorified humanity.
2. This greatfact throws light on the doctrine of substitution. Christ became
man, not a man. Just as we were all in Adam, and are so many multiplied

copies of him, so Christ became the secondAdam, and God looks atus in
Him. Since, then, He was a representative man, all He did and suffered on
earth had a representative character. (E. W. Shalders, B.A.)
Human and Divine relations
There exist three relations which togetherform a sort of hierarchy: lowestin
the scale, the purely human relation betweenman and woman; higher, the
Divine-human relation betweenChrist and man; highest, the purely Divine
relation betweenGod and Christ. The common term whereby Paul
characterises these relations is “head,” or chief. This figurative term includes
two ideas--community of life, and inequality within this community. So
betweenthe man and the woman, by the bond of marriage there is formed
betweenthem the bond of a common life, but in such a way that the one is the
strong and directing element, the other the receptive and dependent element.
The same is the case in the relation betweenChrist and the man. Formed by
the bond of faith, it also establishes a community of life, in which there are
distinguished an active and directing principle and a receptive and directed
factor. An analogousrelationappears higher still in the mystery of the Divine
essence. Bythe bond of filiation there is betweenChrist and God communion
of Divine life, but such that impulse proceeds from the Father, and that “the
Son doeth nothing but what He seeththe Father do.” The relation between
Christ and the man is put first. It is, so to speak, the link of union betweenthe
other two, reflecting the sublimity of the one and marking the other with a
sacredcharacter, whichshould secure it from the violence with which it is
threatened. (Prof. Godet.)
The conduct and deportment of Christian women
A broad principle laid down by Christianity was human equality: “there is
neither male nor female, but ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” We allknow how
fruitful a cause ofpopular commotion the teaching of equality has been in
every age, and at Corinth this doctrine threatened to lead to much social
confusion. A claim was made for a right in woman to do all that men should
do--to preach and pray, e.g., in public, and therefore to appearas men,
unveiled in public. This latter the apostle here prohibits--

I. On the ground that it was a rash defiance of establishedrules of decorum.
The veiled head is a symbol of--
1. Modesty;for to pray unveiled was to insult all the conventional feelings of
Jew and Gentile. The Holy Ghost, however, has not imposed on the Church
this particular fashion, but the principle contained in it is eternal; and it is
impossible to decide how much of our public morality and private purity is
owing to the spirit which refuses to overstepthe smallestbound of ordinary
decorum.
2. Dependence. St. Paulperceived that the law of Christian equality was quite
consistentwith the vast systemof subordination running through the universe
(1 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Corinthians 11:11-12). He distinguishes between
inferiority and subordination; eachsex exists in a certain order, not one as
greaterthan the other, but both greatand right in being what God intended
them to be.
II. By an appealto natural instincts ann propriety (1 Corinthians 11:14-15).
Fanaticismdefies nature. Christianity refines it and respects it. It develops
eachnation, sex, and individual, according to their own nature--making man
more manly and woman more womanly. But let us not forget that here, too,
there are exceptions. Bewareofa dead, hard rule. There have been many
instances in which one man standing againstthe world has been right, and the
world wrong, as Elijah, Athanasius, Luther, and others. But in questions of
morality, propriety, decency, when we find our own private judgment
contradictedby the generalexperience, habit, and belief of all the best around
us, then the doctrine of this chaptercommands us to believe that the many are
right and that we are wrong. (F. W. Robertson, M.A.)
The veil
St. Paul is now compelled to qualify the generalcommendation of 1
Corinthians 11:2. He heard with surprise and vexation that women presumed
to address the assembledChristians unveiled, to the scandalof all sober-

minded Orientals and Greeks. It is a singular specimenof the strange matters
that came before Paul for decisionwhen the care of all the Churches lay upon
him.
I. What was the intention of Christian women in making a demonstration so
unfeminine?
1. Throughout this letter Paul is correcting the hasty impressions which the
new believers were receiving regarding their position as Christians. A flood of
new ideas was suddenly poured in upon their minds, one of which was the
equality of all before God and of a Saviour for all alike. There was neither
Jew nor Greek, male nor female, etc., now. And it dawned on the woman that
she was neither man’s toy nor slave, but that she had a life to frame for
herself. She was not dependent on men for her Christian privileges; ought she
not to show this by laying aside the veil, which was the acknowledgedbadge of
dependence?
2. Among the Greeks it was the universal custom for the women to appear in
public with the head covered, commonly with the cornerof their shawldrawn
over their head like a hood. It was the one significantrite in marriage that she
assumedthe veil in tokenthat now her husband was her head. This covering
could be dispensedwith only in places where they were secludedfrom public
view. It was therefore the badge which proclaimed that she who wore it was a
private, not a public, person, finding her duties at home, not abroad. It was
the man’s place to serve the State or the public, the woman’s place to serve
the man.
II. This movement of the Corinthian women Paul meets by reminding them
that personalequality is perfectly consistentwith socialsubordination. The
woman must not argue that because she is independent of her husband in the
greatersphere she must also be independent of him in the less (1 Corinthians
11:3). This principle is of incalculable importance and very wide and constant
application.

1. Whateveris meant by the natural equality of men, it cannot mean that none
are to have authority over others. In order to the harmony of societythere is a
gradationof ranks;and socialgrievancesresult, not from the existence of
socialdistinctions, but from their abuse. This gradation, then, involves Paul’s
inference (1 Corinthians 11:4-5). The veil being the recognisedbadge of
subordination, when a man appears veiled he would seemto acknowledge
some one present and visible as his head, and would thus dishonour Christ, his
true Head. A woman, on the other hand, appearing unveiled would seemto
say that she acknowledgesno visible human head, and thereby dishonours her
head--i.e., her husband--and so doing, dishonours herself. She puts herself on
the level of the woman with a shaven head, which both among Jews and
Greeks was a brand of disgrace.
WILLIAM BURKITT
Verse 3
Here our apostle answers the query, and resolves the case which the
Corinthians had put to him, and laid before him, about church-order, and
concerning the decent behaviour of men and women in church- assemblies.
And first he reminds them, that a subordination of persons in the church of
God ought to be observedand kept: that as Christ, as Mediator, is inferior to
God the Father, but is the head and lord of all men, as Creatorand
Redeemer;so the man is the head of the woman, and as such she must show
her subjectionunto the man. As Christ, as Mediator, acts in subordination to
the Father, so must the woman actin subordination to the man.
The Socinians would wrestthis text to confirm them in their blasphemous
denial of the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. "Here, saythey, the apostle
declares that the head of Christ is God. Now the most high God can have no

head above him; therefore Christ, who hath an head above him, cannot be the
most high God."
The modern and generalansweris, that God is here calledthe head of Christ
as Mediator, in which relation he receivedhis kingdom from him, and
exercises itfor him; and therefore is elsewhere styledthe Father's servant,
Behold my servant, &c. because he doth all things according to his Father's
will, and with a fixed eye to his Father's glory.
But the ancients reply to this objection thus: "ThatGod is said to be the head
of Christ, as he is the Fatherof the Son, and so the cause of him; and as the
woman is of the same nature with the man, who is her head, so is Christ of the
same nature with God the Father, who is here called his head: The head of
Christ is God."
CALVIN
Verse 3
3.But I would have you know It is an old proverb: “Evil manners begetgood
laws.” (618)As the rite here treatedof had not been previously calledin
question, Paul had given no enactment respecting it. (619)The error of the
Corinthians was the occasionofhis showing, what part it was becoming to act
in this matter. With the view of proving, that it is an unseemly thing for
women to appear in a public assembly with their heads uncovered, and, on the
other hand, for men to pray or prophesy with their heads covered, he sets out
with noticing the arrangements that are divinely established.
He says, that as Christ is subject to God as his head, so is the man subject to
Christ, and the womanto the man We shall afterwards see, how he comes to
infer from this, that women ought to have their heads covered. Let us, for the

present, take notice of those four gradations which he points out. God, then,
occupies the first place:Christ holds the secondplace. How so? Inasmuch as
he has in our flesh made himself subject to the Father, for, apart from this,
being of one essencewith the Father, he is his equal. Let us, therefore, bear it
in mind, that this is spokenof Christ as mediator. He is, I say, inferior to the
Father, inasmuch as he assumed our nature, that he might be the first-born
among many brethren.
There is somewhatmore of difficulty in what follows. Here the man is placed
in an intermediate position betweenChrist and the woman, so that Christ is
not the head of the woman. Yet the same Apostle teaches us elsewhere,
(Galatians 3:28,)that in Christ there is neither male nor female. Why then
does he make a distinction here, which in that passage he does awaywith? I
answer, that the solution of this depends on the connectionin which the
passagesoccur. Whenhe says that there is no difference betweenthe man and
the woman, he is treating of Christ’s spiritual kingdom, in which individual
distinctions (620)are not regarded, or made any accountof; for it has nothing
to do with the body, and has nothing to do with the outward relationships of
mankind, but has to do solelywith the mind — on which accounthe declares
that there is no difference, even betweenbond and free. In the meantime,
however, he does not disturb civil order or honorary distinctions, which
cannot be dispensedwith in ordinary life. Here, on the other hand, he reasons
respecting outward propriety and decorum — which is a part of ecclesiastical
polity. Hence, as regards spiritual connectionin the sight of God, and
inwardly in the conscience, Christis the head of the man and of the woman
without any distinction, because, as to that, there is no regard paid to male or
female; but as regards external arrangementand political decorum, the man
follows Christ and the womanthe man, so that they are not upon the same
footing, but, on the contrary, this inequality exists. Should any one ask, what
connectionmarriage has with Christ, I answer, that Paul speaks here of that
sacredunion of pious persons, of which Christ is the officiating priest, (621)
and He in whose name it is consecrated.

ADAM CLARKE
Verse 3
The head of every man is Christ - The apostle is speaking particularly of
Christianity and its ordinances:Christ is the Head or Author of this religion;
and is the creator, preserver, and Lord of every man. The man also is the lord
or head of the woman; and the Head or Lord of Christ, as Mediatorbetween
God and man, is God the Father. Here is the order - God sends his Son Jesus
Christ to redeem man; Christ comes and lays down his life for the world;
every man who receives Christianity confesses thatJesus Christ is Lord, to the
glory of God the Father; and every believing woman will acknowledge,
according to Genesis 3:16, that God has placedher in a dependence on and
subjection to the man. So far there is no difficulty in this passage.
CONSTABLE
Verse 3
The head of every man is Christ - The apostle is speaking particularly of
Christianity and its ordinances:Christ is the Head or Author of this religion;
and is the creator, preserver, and Lord of every man. The man also is the lord
or head of the woman; and the Head or Lord of Christ, as Mediatorbetween
God and man, is God the Father. Here is the order - God sends his Son Jesus
Christ to redeem man; Christ comes and lays down his life for the world;
every man who receives Christianity confesses thatJesus Christ is Lord, to the
glory of God the Father; and every believing woman will acknowledge,
according to Genesis 3:16, that God has placedher in a dependence on and
subjection to the man. So far there is no difficulty in this passage.

JOHN GILL
Verse 3
practice:

IRONSIDE
Verse 3
practice:

Heinrich Meyer
Verse 3
1 Corinthians 11:3. “After this generalacknowledgment, however, I have still
to bid you lay to heart the following particular point.” And now, first of all,
the principle of the succeeding admonition. Respecting θέλω … εἰδέναι, comp
on 1 Corinthians 10:1; Colossians 2:1.
παντὸς ἀνδρ.] note the prominent position of the word, as also the article
before κεφ.: of every man the Head. That what is meant, however, is every
Christian man, is self-evident from this first clause;consequently, Paul is not
thinking of the generalorder of creation(Hofmann), according to which
Christ is the head of all things (Colossians 1:16 f., 1 Corinthians 2:10), but of
the organizationof Christian fellowship, as it is based upon the work of
redemption. Comp Ephesians 5:21 ff.
κεφαλή, from which we are not (with Hofmann) to dissociatethe conceptionof
an organized whole (this would suit in none of the passageswhere the word
occurs, Colossians2:10 included), designates in all the three caseshere the
proximate, immediate Head, which is to be speciallynoted in the second
instance, for Christ as head of the church (Colossians 1:18;Ephesians 1:22;
Ephesians 4:15) is also head of the woman(comp Ephesians 5:22 f.). The
relation indicated by κεφ. is that of organic subordination, even in the last
clause:He to whom Christ is subordinate is God (comp 1 Corinthians 3:23, 1
Corinthians 15:28, 1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:15;Romans 9:5; and see
Kahnis, Dogm. III. p. 208 ff.), where the dogmatic explanation resortedto,
that Christ in His human nature only is meant (Theodoret, Estius, Calovius,
al(1757)), is un-Pauline. Neither, again, is His voluntary subjection referred to

(Billroth), but—which is exactly what the argument demands, and what the
two first clauses give us—the objective and, notwithstanding His essential
equality with God (Philippians 2:6), necessarysubordination of the Sonto the
Father in the divine economyof redemption.(1758)Much polemic discussion
as to the misuse of this passageby the Arians and others may be found in
Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Theophylact.
Galatians 3:28, indeed, shows that the distinction of the sexes is done awayin
Christ (in the spiritual sphere of the Christian life); but this ideal equality of
sex as little does awaywith the empirical subordination in marriage as with
differences of rank in other earthly relations, e.g. of masters and servants.
κεφ. δὲ χ. ὁ θεός]The gradation of ranks rises up to the supreme Head over
all, who is the Head of the man also, mediately, through Christ. This makes it
all the more obvious that, on the one hand, the man who prays or speaks as a
prophet before God in the assemblyought not to have his head covered, see 1
Corinthians 11:7; but that, on the other hand, the relation of the women
under discussionis all the more widely to be distinguished from that of the
men.
J. LIGON DUNCAN
The main principle stated in the passage is statedin verse 3. That's point one.
The principle that Christ has authority over man; that man has authority
over woman; and God the Father has the authority over Christ. That is the
principle Paul is going to be contending for throughout this passage.
Everything else is just an application of that principle. He believes that that
principle is being violated in Corinth. We've gota little bit of a rebellion on
our hands in Corinth, and there are apparently some women in the
congregationwho want to show that they are liberated. There are different
ways that ladies in the 1960s and70s used to show that they were liberated;
the Corinthians have their own unique way of showing that they are liberated,

and Paul is speaking to that particular issue in the contextof worship. So
there's your principle in verse 3.
What is Headship?
Author: Ray C. Stedman
Readthe Scripture: 1 Corinthians 11:2-16
Chapter eleven of First Corinthians has become a great battlefield of the 20th
century. It is a very complex chapter that deals with the question, "Are
Women Fully Human? or Are They Only Humans, j.g. (Junior Grade)?" This
passagewill dealwith the question of male headship and female subjection,
and other issues of today. It used to be that the focus of the chapterwas on the
question, "Should Women WearHats in Church?" but looking overthis
congregation, I can see that is a long past issue. It has now become a question,
not so much of women wearing hats in church, but of whether they are going
to wearthe pants at home! We shall face these issues that are a part of the
swirl of controversythat has escalatedinto the Feminist Movementof our
day. The apostle introduces this with these words in Chapter 11, Verse 2:
I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the
traditions even as I have delivered them to you. (1 Corinthians 11:2 RSV)
Not all traditions are bad. We have seenin this letter that Christianity
includes not only the revelation of what Paul calls "the mysteries of God,"
those great, marvelous, insightful unfoldings of truth about humanity, and
about life, that are undiscoverable by the natural mind, but it also includes, as
this passagemakesclear, certainimportant and essentialtraditions, i.e.,
practices that have been handed down from generationto generation. In

Chapter 11 there are two traditions the apostle looks at, the tradition of male
headship which dates from the creationof mankind itself, from the earliest
dawn of human history, and the secondone is the tradition of the Lord's
Supper dating from the beginning of the church, as it was instituted in the
Upper Room. In Verse 3 the apostle declares the greattradition of headship as
a principle to govern the people of God for all time. Then in the following
verses (4-16), he clarifies the practice of this principle under the conditions
that were obtaining in Corinth and the world of the 1stcentury. Here is the
principle:
But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of
a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. (1 Corinthians 11:3
RSV)
When the apostle uses the word head here he is using the ordinary word for
the hairy knob that sits on top of the neck, which contains the brain, and the
eyes, ears, nose and mouth, and which, even in the ancientworld, was
understood to be the control centerof the body. There are some today who
would argue that the ancients did not understand that, but I think it is obvious
they did, because four of our five sensesare centeredin the head. They well
knew that to remove the head from the body ended the life and activity of that
body. Thus Herodias, the wife of Herod, ordered the head of John the Baptist
brought to her on a platter because she knew that would slow John down to a
point where she could handle him.
Now when head is used metaphorically, figuratively, as it is here, it refers to
priority in function. That is what the head of our body does;it runs the body;
it is in charge;it is the direction setter of the body. Used metaphorically,
therefore, the word head means primarily leadership, and thus it is used in
this passage. This is clear, I think, from the threefold use of it that the apostle
makes here. The one in controversyis the secondone, "the head of the woman
is her husband," but he brackets this with two other examples of headship so
that we might understand from them what the middle one means.
The first one is, "the head of every man is Christ." There is the declarationof
Christ's right to lead the whole human race. He is the leaderof the race in the

mind and thinking of God, and ultimately, as Scripture tells us, there will
come a day when all humanity, without exception, shall bow the knee and
confess that Jesus Christis Lord Romans 14:11, Philippians 2:11). So whether
men know it or not, Christ is their head, and they are responsible to follow
him. That is the whole objective of life for any man who wishes to fulfill his
manhood. Of course, that is only seenin practice in the believer, and then only
to a limited degree, but it is statedvery positively here. In the book of Hebrew
sit says that Christ is "the pioneerof our salvation" (Hebrews 5:9, 12:2), the
one who goes before;the one who opens the way. This is the sense here of this
metaphoricaluse of the word head. Christ is the leaderof the race, the
determiner of every man's destiny, the One to be followed.
Now move down to the third level of headship mentioned here, "the head of
Christ is God." Here we have a manifestation of headship demonstrated for us
in history. Jesus, the Son of God, equal to the Fatherin his deity, nevertheless,
when he assumes humanity, submits himself to the leadership of the Father.
Everywhere Jesus wenthe statedthis. "I do always those things which please
my Father." On one occasionhe said, "My meat is to do my Father's will, and
to please him who sent me," John 4:34). On another occasionhe said, "I and
my Fatherare one" (John 10:30), i.e., we work together. He adds on still
another occasion, "MyFatheris greaterthan I," (John 14:28). That does not
challenge the equality of the members of the Godhead, but when Christ
became man he voluntarily consentedto take a lowerposition than the Father.
It is in that sense he says, "MyFather is greater than I."
Those two headships help us to understand the meaning of the centralone,
"the head of the woman is the man." The RSV says, "the head of the woman
is her husband" but that is interpretation. The word used is aner, the male.
Though the subsequentpassage has in view a married woman, this general
statementof the principle of headship has in view men and womenin the way
they function in society. But it must be remembered that headship never
means domination. It is a voluntary commitment, carried out in practice out
of a conviction that God's will is best achievedby this means.
It is to be most visible in marriage where it manifests that role of support
which a woman undertakes voluntarily when she marries a man. He is to be

leaderand she assumes a support role to help him fulfill the objectives of their
life togetheras Christ, his head, makes clear. Now if she does not want to do
that she is perfectly free not to undertake that role. No woman should get
married if she does not want to. This is a role that she is perfectly free to
forego if she chooses. If she wants to give herselfto the pursuit of a careerfor
her own objectives, she has every right to do so. But then she ought not to get
married, because marriage means that she desires to help advance the
objectives and goals of her husband. He becomes, therefore, the leaderof the
two.
Now that is the principle of headship, and the apostle has statedit as clearly
and as objectively as it can be stated. It does not involve the idea of origin so
much as it does direction. This is the way headship is used in other parts of the
Scripture as well. In Ephesians we are told that Christ is the head of the
church which is his body, by which it means he is its leaderand has the right
to set the ultimate direction of the relationship. In Verse 4 and on the apostle
applies this principle to the practice of the church, especiallyas it was lived
within the Easternculture of that 1stcentury world. So he says in Verse 4:
Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covereddishonors his head,
but any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors her
head -- it is the same as if her head were shaven. For if a woman will not veil
herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgracefulfor a womanto
be shorn or shaven, let her weara veil. (1 Corinthians 11:4-6 RSV)
Two things are very important to notice in that paragraph: One: The center
of Paul's concernis the public ministry of the Word of God. He is talking here
about Christians, about the church, the gathering of believers togetherin a
public assembly. In order to properly function in that capacity, a woman
should weara veil, but a man should not. That is the secondthing to note. The
veil comes in as the symbol of the acceptanceandunderstanding of the
principle of headship which he has just declared. Where public ministry is
involved it is just as important that man should not be coveredas that a
woman should. That was the application of headship in the culture and
custom of that day and time.

It is significant to note that both men and womenwere free to exercise
ministry. Both could pray and prophesy. As we have seenfrom other passages
of Scripture, and will come to see most clearlyin the fourteenth chapter,
prophesying is what today we call preaching. It is expounding the Word of
God, taking the Scriptures and making them shine and illuminate life. Either
a woman or a man could do that, but it was very important how they did it.
That is the emphasis this passagemakes.Theymust do it in two different
ways, the male as a man, the woman as a woman. That is the central emphasis
of this text.
If the man does not pray or prophesy as a man should in that culture then he
dishonors his head. It is very remarkable that Paul would say that a man,
ministering in public, should not have anything on his head, for the practice
among the Jews was for men to weara head covering when they ministered.
In this neighborhood we often see Jewishpeople walking around, and the men
will have the yarmulke (a beanie, we would call it) on their head. It is the
prescribed covering for the head, and no orthodox male Jew would ever think
of reading the Scripture or ministering in public without it. But Paul the
Apostle, raisedin Judaism, says that if a Christian man does that he is
dishonoring Christ, his head.
On the other hand, if a woman does not have a covering (in this 1stcentury
Christian setting) she dishonors her head, her husband. The reasonfor that
was dramatically obvious in Corinth. In this city, the most licentious city of
the 1stcentury, the only women who did not weara veil were the temple
prostitutes. Any woman, therefore, who appearedon the public streets
without a veil was opening herself up to the suspicion that she was available to
any man who wantedto pay the price, that she was nothing more than a
temple prostitute. It was indeed disgraceful, shameful, for a woman to appear
in public, and especiallyto minister the Word in a Christian assembly,
without that sign of acknowledgmentof the principle of headship in her life.
Notice that Paul says, "if it is disgracefulfor a woman to be shorn or shaven,
let her weara veil." Mark the if. In some cultures it would not be disgraceful
for a womanto be uncovered. It is not today. It is no longershameful that a
woman does not weara hat in church. She is not open to abuse or suspicionof

her moral characteris she does not. It is only where it is disgraceful, where
that is the usual interpretation put upon being uncovered, that this applies. If
it is not disgracefulthen it is another matter. But where it is disgraceful, as in
Corinth, then Paul says that if she does not want to wearthe signof a
relationship under headship, then she ought to go the whole way and shave
her head like a prostitute because that is what she is proclaiming herselfto be
by her refusal to wearthe veil and submit to custom. Now, immediately, the
apostle follows this with an explanation. Here we come to the very heart of the
passage. He tells us why all this is true.
For a man ought not to coverhis head, since he is the image and glory of God;
but womanis the glory of man. (For man was not made from woman, but
woman from man. Neither was man createdfor woman, but woman for man.)
(1 Corinthians 11:7-9 RSV)
That is a very crucial paragraph, and one that we must note carefully and
understand fully. You will notice the apostle does not base his reasons onany
localcustom. He goes back to creationto establish this. The principle of
headship is something true from the beginning of mankind. Paul does just as
Jesus did on the subject of divorce. He does not bother with the
interpretations and amendments that came by the Law of Moses, but he goes
back to God's original createdorder. So does the apostle here. He says that, in
the beginning, man was made in the image and glory of God. Image is the full
manifestation of something. In this case it is God himself. Man was made in
God's image in order that any creature, looking at a man, would see the
likeness, the very nature of God. That is the dignity of humanity.
What we must bear clearlyin mind is that, when Genesis statesthe man was
made in the image of God, it was made before the two sexes were separated.
Adam was first created, and it was of Adam, before Eve was separatedfrom
him, that it is saidthat man is the image and glory of God. This means that
after the separationwomanshares the image and the glory of God equally
with the male. They are both included when it is saidthat man was made in
the image and the glory of God. That is why in Genesis 5 (not Genesis 1 now,
but Genesis 5)it says that Godcreatedthem in the beginning male and female
and he named them Adam (Genesis 5:1-2). He did not name them the

Adams's, he named them Adam. Therefore, the woman bears equally with the
male the image and glory of God. That is very important. The male, however,
is calledupon to manifest a certain aspectofthe glory of God different from
that of the woman. We shall understand that better when we understand the
meaning of glory.
What is glory? As it is used here, the word refers to something in which one
takes delight. We have often sung the hymn, In the Cross ofChrist I Glory.
What do we mean by that? We mean the cross is something in which we find
supreme delight. It is that principle of life by which we see ourselves cutoff
from the old Adam life and freed from the controlof sin and death; thus set
free to be the men and womenGod intended us to be. Understanding that we
sing quite properly (along with the Apostle Paul), "In the Cross of Christ I
Glory." Paul could write to the Thessalonians andsay, "Who is our crownof
rejoicing? Are you not our glory and our joy?" 1 Thessalonians2:19).
So used, this verse tells us that, when man was created, he was made to reflect
the nature of God, and, in that, God takes greatdelight. He delights in
mankind and this is what the male is to represent. That glory of God is to be
publicly and openly manifested and that is why the man must not weara veil.
He is not to cover God's creative glory. He is to be unveiled so that the glory of
God in creationshould be visibly manifest to everyone.
You see this beautifully in the life of Jesus. Everywhere he went he
demonstrated the love of God for mankind. Even though the race had turned
aside and was far from what it ought to be, everywhere in the ministry of
Jesus you see him pouring forth the love of God for man. That is what drew
people by greatmultitudes to hear his words. In him they caughta glimpse of
the glory and delight that God takes in humanity and they longed to find the
way back to the enjoyment of that delight. Thus in the opening words of
John's gospelit says, "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us," and "we
beheld his glory," (John 1:14). This is the glory that a man, a male, is called
upon to manifest in the ministry of the Word. He is not to be veiled because he
is proclaiming that open delight which God takes in the creationof mankind.

But woman is the glory of the man. It is in the woman that the man finds his
delight, and, if you do not believe that, just watch a couple of teenagersin
love. Woman is the delight of man. The apostle is now dealing with the woman
as having been separatedfrom the man. The distinction which obtained when
God took Adam's rib and made of it a womanand brought her to man now
comes into focus. It involves a private, intimate glory, that intimacy which a
man finds in his wife, the intimacy of sexual relationship and of shared love. It
is something hidden and private, therefore it is to be symbolized by a veil. It
marks something protected, something marked out for a single individual's
use. Thus the veil is not a mark of subjection, as many of the commentators
say of this passage,it is a mark of intimacy, of privacy, voluntarily assumed
by the woman. She is not forcedto give herself to the man, she deliberately
choosesto do so, but from then on she is marked out as belonging to him.
The nearestequivalent of this in our day is the wedding ring. A wedding ring
marks a womanas belonging to another, already claimed. She has given
herself freely and voluntarily to a man and she is his, not in a mechanicalor
merely legalsense, but because she has already surrendered her right to
herself to him. That is always the meaning of the veil in the EasternWorld. It
still is today. A veiled woman walks down a streetof an Oriental city today
and she is telling the whole world "I am not for sale;I do not belong to anyone
but my husband; I am his."
In wearing a veil a woman also gives testimony to the existence ofanother
aspectof the glory of God, the intimacy of delight that is achievedonly
through redemption. When we enter, by faith in Jesus Christ, into the new
birth we discovera glory of God beyond creation. It is redemptive glory. We
all have experiencedit, if we are Christians. We know the ecstasyoffellowship
with God, of worship, of experiencing the beautiful and intimate love
relationship of a bride with her bridegroom, describedin that marvelous
passagein the fifth chapterof Ephesians. Thatis what a woman manifests in
her public ministry when she wears a veil. She is symbolizing that intimate
delight which God has in a redeemedmankind. I cannot now dwell on that,
though I think it very important, but this is surely why Paul goes onto point
out the unique purpose for the creationof woman. "Forman was not made

from woman, but woman from man. Neitherwas man createdfor woman, but
woman for man."
Woman was takenfrom man in order that she might share fully his nature.
Man and woman are not two different kinds of beings. They do not represent
two species ofhuman life. They have differences, but they are of the same
basic nature. This is what is meant by 'woman being takenfrom man.' But, in
addition, she is brought to man. She was brought to him that she might be
'for' him. This, I think, is the keythought involved in headship. She is for her
husband; she is behind him, backing him up; she is supportive of him; she
wants him to succeedand she is deeply involved in the process. She is
undergirding him in every way she can, and finding delight in doing so, that
togetherthey might achieve the objectives which his head, Christ, has set
before them. Now, that is God's ideal of marriage.
In turn, the male is to discoverthe secretsGodhas put into his wife, and seek
to develop her, so that she will be all that she is capable of being. In doing so
he is but advancing his own objectives. This is the argument of Ephesians 5.
They are one and no man hates his own flesh. If he hurts his wife he hurts
himself; if he ignores her, he is ignoring half of his ownlife. There is no way
that he can achieve the fullness of his manhood in marriage apart from
working at developing and encouraging his wife to utilize all the gifts and
abilities God has put in her. Thus, the reciprocalrelationship so frequently
appearing in Scripture on marriage. It is this that creates the beauty of every
wedding. When a man and a woman stand togetherto be married, the
marriage ceremony has for centuries recognizedthat she is giving herself to
him, and he promises to treat that gift with kindness, tenderness and loving
care. He is not giving himself to her; she is giving herself to him: That is the
point. He is responsible to cherishthat gift as the most valuable gift that any
human has ever given him, and to protect it and guard it. She is basically
saying to him those beautiful words in the book of Ruth, "Where you go I will
go. Where you live I will live. Your people shall be my people and your God,
my God," Ruth 1:16). Now, if you do not want to do that, then do not get
married -- because that is what marriage means. If man or a woman is not
willing to assume his or her proper role in marriage, then, by all means, stay

single, but when marriage occurs that is what is meant. Paul goes onto add
two more important words here from the argument of creation, first:
That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because ofthe angels.
(1 Corinthians 11:10 RSV)
What does he mean by that? Unfortunately the RSV editors have obscured
this by translating the word Paul uses as veil. But here he changes the word.
He does not say "veil on her head" -- literally it is the word "authority."
"Thatis why a woman ought to have authority on her head, because ofthe
angels." Authority to do what? Surely it is what he has already mentioned,
what the whole passageis about: A woman ministering the Word in public.
The authority for her to do so is her recognitionof the principle of headship.
She is to declare that she does not pray or preach apart from her husband,
and thus she is to weara veil which, in that culture, was the sign of such a
voluntary partnership.
She is to do so, Paul says, "because ofthe angels." Now thatis somewhat
obscure and difficult to interpret, but, in a culture where unveiled women
were regardedas idolators and prostitutes, it would be an offense to the angels
present in a Christian service for a womanto openly flaunt customand deny
the principle of headship. Angels, we are told, are "ministering spirits, sent
forth to minister to those who are heirs of salvation," Hebrews 1:14 KJV).
They were present at creation, and thus understand the principle of headship.
Isaiah6 indicates that they veil their faces whenthey worship before the
throne of God Isaiah6:2), and so are concernedto preserve the worship of
humans from any practice that would deny the distinctives which the sexes
are to manifest. In the next two verses Paul balances allthis with a strong
statementof the equality of men and women in marriage.
(Nevertheless,in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of
woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman.
And all things are from God.) (1 Corinthians 11:11-12 RSV)
Here is a very positive statementof the full equality (as persons) of men and
women. There is no inferiority involved. No matter what distortions may have
crept in to reduce woman to an inferior status, nevertheless, in the Lord, the

original intent of Godis restored. Paulcarefully declares that man and
woman cannotexist without eachother. They are equal as persons, distinct as
sexes, functioning in a divinely given order which is to be freely acceptedby
the woman, in order to demonstrate to all the delight of God in his creation
and redemption of mankind. If we will carefully think that through we shall
find it is a very powerful argument for equality of persons and distinctives of
role. Now let me quickly handle the problem of hair.
Judge for yourselves;is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head
uncovered? Does not nature itself teachyou that for a man to wearlong hair
is degrading to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her pride? For her hair
is given to her for a covering. (1 Corinthians 11:13-15 RSV)
This is really a secondargument the apostle gives to support the matter of
wearing a veil. He argues now from nature. Notonly does God's intent in
creationsustain the principle of headship, but nature also illustrates it. Many
have struggledover this passage. I have myself, for many years. What is there
about nature that indicates that a man with long hair dishonors himself while
a woman with long hair is honored? It is not mere intuition, as some suggest,
for such an intuition is not universal. But there is a principle that science has
come to recognize as true, and it has been true from the very beginning of the
race, as far as we can tell. That is the factorof baldness. Geneticists tell us that
it takes two genes in a woman to produce baldness, but only one in a man.
Some women do get bald, but it is very rare.
Here is a natural factorthat has been functioning since the race beganwhich
does, indeed, display the very thing that Paul declares. Did you ever see a bald
old man with long hair? It is a disgrace!Long hair is usually stringy when it is
sparse and with his shining dome sticking up above it makes him look
ridiculous. Almost all men, as they grow older, tend to show some degree of
baldness, and the older they grow the more ridiculous long hair looks. A
young man can get awaywith long hair, but an older man cannot. Thus there
is a factorin nature which demonstrates whatPaul claims. Tradition tells us
that Paul himself was bald and perhaps this statementcomes out of his own
experience.

Jesus was the head of every man

Jesus was the head of every man

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to Jesus was the head of every man

Similar to Jesus was the head of every man (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (17)

Jesus was the head of every man